{"markup":"\u003C?xml version=\u00221.0\u0022 encoding=\u0022UTF-8\u0022 ?\u003E\n \u003Chtml version=\u0022HTML+RDFa+MathML 1.1\u0022\n xmlns:content=\u0022http:\/\/purl.org\/rss\/1.0\/modules\/content\/\u0022\n xmlns:dc=\u0022http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/\u0022\n xmlns:foaf=\u0022http:\/\/xmlns.com\/foaf\/0.1\/\u0022\n xmlns:og=\u0022http:\/\/ogp.me\/ns#\u0022\n xmlns:rdfs=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/01\/rdf-schema#\u0022\n xmlns:sioc=\u0022http:\/\/rdfs.org\/sioc\/ns#\u0022\n xmlns:sioct=\u0022http:\/\/rdfs.org\/sioc\/types#\u0022\n xmlns:skos=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2004\/02\/skos\/core#\u0022\n xmlns:xsd=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2001\/XMLSchema#\u0022\n xmlns:mml=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1998\/Math\/MathML\u0022\u003E\n \u003Chead\u003E\u003Cscript type=\u0022text\/javascript\u0022\u003E\n\u003C!--\/\/--\u003E\u003C![CDATA[\/\/\u003E\u003C!--\nif(typeof window.MathJax === \u0022undefined\u0022) window.MathJax = { menuSettings: { zoom: \u0022Click\u0022 } };\n\/\/--\u003E\u003C!]]\u003E\n\u003C\/script\u003E\n\u003Cscript type=\u0022text\/javascript\u0022 src=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/sites\/default\/files\/js\/js_gPqjYq7fqdMzw8-29XWQIVoDSWTmZCGy9OqaHppNxuQ.js\u0022\u003E\u003C\/script\u003E\n\u003Cscript type=\u0022text\/javascript\u0022\u003E\n\u003C!--\/\/--\u003E\u003C![CDATA[\/\/\u003E\u003C!--\n(function(i,s,o,g,r,a,m){i[\u0022GoogleAnalyticsObject\u0022]=r;i[r]=i[r]||function(){(i[r].q=i[r].q||[]).push(arguments)},i[r].l=1*new Date();a=s.createElement(o),m=s.getElementsByTagName(o)[0];a.async=1;a.src=g;m.parentNode.insertBefore(a,m)})(window,document,\u0022script\u0022,\u0022\/\/www.google-analytics.com\/analytics.js\u0022,\u0022ga\u0022);ga(\u0022create\u0022, \u0022UA-1707495-1\u0022, {\u0022cookieDomain\u0022:\u0022auto\u0022});ga(\u0022set\u0022, \u0022anonymizeIp\u0022, true);ga(\u0022send\u0022, \u0022pageview\u0022);ga(\u0027create\u0027, \u0027UA-189672-46\u0027, \u0027auto\u0027, {\u0027name\u0027: \u0027hwTracker\u0027});\r\nga(\u0027set\u0027, \u0027anonymizeIp\u0027, true);\nga(\u0027hwTracker.send\u0027, \u0027pageview\u0027);\n\/\/--\u003E\u003C!]]\u003E\n\u003C\/script\u003E\n\u003Cscript type=\u0022text\/javascript\u0022\u003E\n\u003C!--\/\/--\u003E\u003C![CDATA[\/\/\u003E\u003C!--\njQuery.extend(Drupal.settings, {\u0022basePath\u0022:\u0022\\\/\u0022,\u0022pathPrefix\u0022:\u0022\u0022,\u0022highwire\u0022:{\u0022ac\u0022:{\u0022\\\/jneuro\\\/25\\\/36\\\/8173.atom\u0022:{\u0022access\u0022:{\u0022full\u0022:true},\u0022pisa_id\u0022:\u0022\u0022,\u0022apath\u0022:\u0022\\\/jneuro\\\/25\\\/36\\\/8173.atom\u0022,\u0022jcode\u0022:\u0022jneuro\u0022}},\u0022processed\u0022:[\u0022highwire_math\u0022],\u0022markup\u0022:[{\u0022requested\u0022:\u0022expansion\u0022,\u0022variant\u0022:\u0022expansion\u0022,\u0022view\u0022:\u0022full\u0022,\u0022pisa\u0022:\u0022jneuro;25\\\/36\\\/8173\\\/FIG1\u0022},{\u0022requested\u0022:\u0022expansion\u0022,\u0022variant\u0022:\u0022expansion\u0022,\u0022view\u0022:\u0022full\u0022,\u0022pisa\u0022:\u0022jneuro;25\\\/36\\\/8173\\\/FIG2\u0022},{\u0022requested\u0022:\u0022expansion\u0022,\u0022variant\u0022:\u0022expansion\u0022,\u0022view\u0022:\u0022full\u0022,\u0022pisa\u0022:\u0022jneuro;25\\\/36\\\/8173\\\/FIG3\u0022},{\u0022requested\u0022:\u0022expansion\u0022,\u0022variant\u0022:\u0022expansion\u0022,\u0022view\u0022:\u0022full\u0022,\u0022pisa\u0022:\u0022jneuro;25\\\/36\\\/8173\\\/FIG4\u0022},{\u0022requested\u0022:\u0022expansion\u0022,\u0022variant\u0022:\u0022expansion\u0022,\u0022view\u0022:\u0022full\u0022,\u0022pisa\u0022:\u0022jneuro;25\\\/36\\\/8173\\\/FIG5\u0022},{\u0022requested\u0022:\u0022expansion\u0022,\u0022variant\u0022:\u0022expansion\u0022,\u0022view\u0022:\u0022full\u0022,\u0022pisa\u0022:\u0022jneuro;25\\\/36\\\/8173\\\/FIG6\u0022},{\u0022requested\u0022:\u0022expansion\u0022,\u0022variant\u0022:\u0022expansion\u0022,\u0022view\u0022:\u0022full\u0022,\u0022pisa\u0022:\u0022jneuro;25\\\/36\\\/8173\\\/FIG7\u0022},{\u0022requested\u0022:\u0022expansion\u0022,\u0022variant\u0022:\u0022expansion\u0022,\u0022view\u0022:\u0022full\u0022,\u0022pisa\u0022:\u0022jneuro;25\\\/36\\\/8173\\\/FIG8\u0022},{\u0022requested\u0022:\u0022expansion\u0022,\u0022variant\u0022:\u0022expansion\u0022,\u0022view\u0022:\u0022full\u0022,\u0022pisa\u0022:\u0022jneuro;25\\\/36\\\/8173\\\/FIG9\u0022},{\u0022requested\u0022:\u0022expansion\u0022,\u0022variant\u0022:\u0022expansion\u0022,\u0022view\u0022:\u0022full\u0022,\u0022pisa\u0022:\u0022jneuro;25\\\/36\\\/8173\\\/FIG10\u0022},{\u0022requested\u0022:\u0022expansion\u0022,\u0022variant\u0022:\u0022expansion\u0022,\u0022view\u0022:\u0022full\u0022,\u0022pisa\u0022:\u0022jneuro;25\\\/36\\\/8173\\\/FIG11\u0022}]},\u0022googleanalytics\u0022:{\u0022trackOutbound\u0022:1,\u0022trackMailto\u0022:1,\u0022trackDownload\u0022:1,\u0022trackDownloadExtensions\u0022:\u00227z|aac|arc|arj|asf|asx|avi|bin|csv|doc(x|m)?|dot(x|m)?|exe|flv|gif|gz|gzip|hqx|jar|jpe?g|js|mp(2|3|4|e?g)|mov(ie)?|msi|msp|pdf|phps|png|ppt(x|m)?|pot(x|m)?|pps(x|m)?|ppam|sld(x|m)?|thmx|qtm?|ra(m|r)?|sea|sit|tar|tgz|torrent|txt|wav|wma|wmv|wpd|xls(x|m|b)?|xlt(x|m)|xlam|xml|z|zip\u0022,\u0022trackColorbox\u0022:1},\u0022ajaxPageState\u0022:{\u0022js\u0022:{\u00220\u0022:1,\u0022sites\\\/all\\\/modules\\\/contrib\\\/google_analytics\\\/googleanalytics.js\u0022:1,\u00221\u0022:1}}});\n\/\/--\u003E\u003C!]]\u003E\n\u003C\/script\u003E\n\u003Clink type=\u0022text\/css\u0022 rel=\u0022stylesheet\u0022 href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/sites\/default\/files\/advagg_css\/css__KwIbTmK5u_TU0NIDnj2cXC8qhcT3ubSigju5zweyvGo__F4hNhfnh3E6h8wsLAJK1otV7e3-yqWoSKzqul-7hqnk__lscwJUsLzQEwkQVB3dgCncG385C2NjjYPLjGbWnso7U.css\u0022 media=\u0022all\u0022 \/\u003E\n\u003Clink rel=\u0027stylesheet\u0027 type=\u0027text\/css\u0027 href=\u0027\/sites\/all\/modules\/contrib\/panels\/plugins\/layouts\/onecol\/onecol.css\u0027 \/\u003E\u003C\/head\u003E\u003Cbody\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022panels-ajax-tab-panel panels-ajax-tab-panel-jnl-sfneneuro-tab-data\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022panel-display panel-1col clearfix\u0022 \u003E\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022panel-panel panel-col\u0022\u003E\n \u003Cdiv\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022panel-pane pane-article-fig-data\u0022 \u003E\n \n \u003Ch2 class=\u0022pane-title\u0022\u003EArticle Figures \u0026amp; Data\u003C\/h2\u003E\n \n \n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022pane-content\u0022\u003E\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022elements-frag-data highwire-markup\u0022 id=\u0022fig-data\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv id=\u0022fig-data-figures\u0022 class=\u0022group frag-figure\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-data-title-jump clearfix\u0022\u003E\u003Ch3 class=\u0022fig-data-group-title\u0022\u003EFigures\u003C\/h3\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-data-jump-links\u0022\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022item-list\u0022\u003E\u003Cul class=\u0022fig-data-list clearfix\u0022 id=\u0022fragments-fig\u0022\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022first\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022element-fig-data clearfix figure-caption\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022highwire-markup\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv xmlns=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022 id=\u0022content-block-markup\u0022 xmlns:xhtml=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-expansion\u0022 id=\u0022F1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022highwire-journal-article-marker-start\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022highwire-figure\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-inline-img-wrapper\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-inline-img\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F1.large.jpg?width=800\u0026amp;height=600\u0026amp;carousel=1\u0022 title=\u0022MF-GCEPSCs display considerable variability in amplitude and shape from trial to trial at an individual connection and across connections. A1, Five consecutive EPSCs arising from an individual MF-GC connection (artifact blanked). A2, Fifty superimposed, consecutive EPSC responses. B, Distribution of EPSC amplitude (B1), weighted decay (B2), and charge transfer (B3) for 342 EPSCs recorded from the same neuron, the responses of which are illustrated in A. Amplitude (B1) was measured over a 0.1 ms window corresponding to the peak of the direct response (see Materials and Methods). Weighted decay (B2) was calculated for events that exceeded three times the SD of the baseline by integrating over 20 ms (charge transfer) and dividing by peak amplitude. C\u0026#x2013;E show distributions of peak amplitude (C), weighted decay (D), and charge transfer (E) of the mean EPSCs across 79 different MF-GC connections.\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-images colorbox-load\u0022 rel=\u0022gallery-fragment-images-765194029\u0022 data-figure-caption=\u0022\u0026lt;div class=\u0026quot;highwire-markup\u0026quot;\u0026gt;MF-GCEPSCs display considerable variability in amplitude and shape from trial to trial at an individual connection and across connections. A1, Five consecutive EPSCs arising from an individual MF-GC connection (artifact blanked). A2, Fifty superimposed, consecutive EPSC responses. B, Distribution of EPSC amplitude (B1), weighted decay (B2), and charge transfer (B3) for 342 EPSCs recorded from the same neuron, the responses of which are illustrated in A. Amplitude (B1) was measured over a 0.1 ms window corresponding to the peak of the direct response (see Materials and Methods). Weighted decay (B2) was calculated for events that exceeded three times the SD of the baseline by integrating over 20 ms (charge transfer) and dividing by peak amplitude. C\u0026#x2013;E show distributions of peak amplitude (C), weighted decay (D), and charge transfer (E) of the mean EPSCs across 79 different MF-GC connections.\u0026lt;\/div\u0026gt;\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022hw-responsive-img\u0022\u003E\u003Cimg class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-image lazyload\u0022 alt=\u0022Figure 1.\u0022 src=\u0022data:image\/gif;base64,R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAP\/\/\/yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAIBRAA7\u0022 data-src=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F1.medium.gif\u0022 width=\u0022397\u0022 height=\u0022440\u0022\/\u003E\u003Cnoscript\u003E\u003Cimg class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-image\u0022 alt=\u0022Figure 1.\u0022 src=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F1.medium.gif\u0022 width=\u0022397\u0022 height=\u0022440\u0022\/\u003E\u003C\/noscript\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cul class=\u0022highwire-figure-links inline\u0022\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022download-fig first\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F1.large.jpg?download=true\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-download\u0022 title=\u0022Download Figure 1.\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EDownload figure\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022new-tab\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F1.large.jpg\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-newtab\u0022 target=\u0022_blank\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EOpen in new tab\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022download-ppt last\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022\/highwire\/powerpoint\/467036\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-ppt\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EDownload powerpoint\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003C\/ul\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-caption\u0022 xmlns:xhtml=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022fig-label\u0022\u003E\n Figure 1.\n \u003C\/span\u003E \n \u003Cp id=\u0022p-16\u0022\u003EMF-GCEPSCs display considerable variability in amplitude and shape from trial to trial at an individual connection and across connections. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EA1\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E, Five consecutive EPSCs arising from an individual MF-GC connection (artifact blanked). \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EA2\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E, Fifty superimposed, consecutive EPSC responses. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EB\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E, Distribution of EPSC amplitude (\u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EB1\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E), weighted decay (\u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EB2\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E), and charge transfer (\u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EB3\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E) for 342 EPSCs recorded from the same neuron, the responses of which are illustrated in \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EA\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E. Amplitude (\u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EB1\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E) was measured over a 0.1 ms window corresponding to the peak of the direct response (see Materials and Methods). Weighted decay (\u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EB2\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E) was calculated for events that exceeded three times the SD of the baseline by integrating over 20 ms (charge transfer) and dividing by peak amplitude. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EC\u2013E\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E show distributions of peak amplitude (\u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EC\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E), weighted decay (\u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003ED\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E), and charge transfer (\u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EE\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E) of the mean EPSCs across 79 different MF-GC connections.\u003C\/p\u003E\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022sb-div caption-clear\u0022\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022highwire-journal-article-marker-end\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cspan id=\u0022related-urls\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022element-fig-data clearfix figure-caption\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022highwire-markup\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv xmlns=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022 id=\u0022content-block-markup\u0022 xmlns:xhtml=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-expansion\u0022 id=\u0022F2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022highwire-journal-article-marker-start\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022highwire-figure\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-inline-img-wrapper\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-inline-img\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F2.large.jpg?width=800\u0026amp;height=600\u0026amp;carousel=1\u0022 title=\u0022Analysis of an MF-GC connection with a putative single functional release site. A shows three sets of 25 consecutive responses at 1.25, 2, and 5 mm [Ca2+]; stimulus artifacts have been blanked. B, Relationship between the mean amplitude of all responses (purple), successes (black), spillover-corrected successes (red), isolated spillover (green), and [Ca2+]. Open triangles indicate the predicted relationship between mean amplitude of EPSC successes (A) and [Ca2+] assuming N = 1 (tip up) or N = 2 (tip down) from the following: \\batchmode \\documentclass[fleqn,10pt,legalpaper]{article} \\usepackage{amssymb} \\usepackage{amsfonts} \\usepackage{amsmath} \\pagestyle{empty} \\begin{document} \\[\\ A=NQ\\frac{(1-f^{1{\/}N})}{(1-f)},\\ \\] \\end{document} where the failure rate (f) = 0.87, 0.78, and 0.23 at 1, 2, and 5 mm [Ca2+], respectively. C1 shows isolated components of the EPSC and their sum in 2 mm [Ca2+] (top) and 5 mm [Ca2+] (bottom). The red traces show the quantal waveform measured at 1.25 mm [Ca2+]. The green traces show the mean isolated spillover current in the absence of direct release. The blue traces show the linear sum of the spillover and quantal currents, and the black traces show the observed mean successes. C2 shows the difference between observed and expected current waveforms in C1.\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-images colorbox-load\u0022 rel=\u0022gallery-fragment-images-765194029\u0022 data-figure-caption=\u0022\u0026lt;div class=\u0026quot;highwire-markup\u0026quot;\u0026gt;Analysis of an MF-GC connection with a putative single functional release site. A shows three sets of 25 consecutive responses at 1.25, 2, and 5 mm [Ca2+]; stimulus artifacts have been blanked. B, Relationship between the mean amplitude of all responses (purple), successes (black), spillover-corrected successes (red), isolated spillover (green), and [Ca2+]. Open triangles indicate the predicted relationship between mean amplitude of EPSC successes (A) and [Ca2+] assuming N = 1 (tip up) or N = 2 (tip down) from the following: \\batchmode \\documentclass[fleqn,10pt,legalpaper]{article} \\usepackage{amssymb} \\usepackage{amsfonts} \\usepackage{amsmath} \\pagestyle{empty} \\begin{document} \\[\\ A=NQ\\frac{(1-f^{1{\/}N})}{(1-f)},\\ \\] \\end{document} where the failure rate (f) = 0.87, 0.78, and 0.23 at 1, 2, and 5 mm [Ca2+], respectively. C1 shows isolated components of the EPSC and their sum in 2 mm [Ca2+] (top) and 5 mm [Ca2+] (bottom). The red traces show the quantal waveform measured at 1.25 mm [Ca2+]. The green traces show the mean isolated spillover current in the absence of direct release. The blue traces show the linear sum of the spillover and quantal currents, and the black traces show the observed mean successes. C2 shows the difference between observed and expected current waveforms in C1.\u0026lt;\/div\u0026gt;\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022hw-responsive-img\u0022\u003E\u003Cimg class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-image lazyload\u0022 alt=\u0022Figure 2.\u0022 src=\u0022data:image\/gif;base64,R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAP\/\/\/yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAIBRAA7\u0022 data-src=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F2.medium.gif\u0022 width=\u0022440\u0022 height=\u0022222\u0022\/\u003E\u003Cnoscript\u003E\u003Cimg class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-image\u0022 alt=\u0022Figure 2.\u0022 src=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F2.medium.gif\u0022 width=\u0022440\u0022 height=\u0022222\u0022\/\u003E\u003C\/noscript\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cul class=\u0022highwire-figure-links inline\u0022\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022download-fig first\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F2.large.jpg?download=true\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-download\u0022 title=\u0022Download Figure 2.\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EDownload figure\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022new-tab\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F2.large.jpg\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-newtab\u0022 target=\u0022_blank\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EOpen in new tab\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022download-ppt last\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022\/highwire\/powerpoint\/467038\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-ppt\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EDownload powerpoint\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003C\/ul\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-caption\u0022 xmlns:xhtml=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022fig-label\u0022\u003E\n Figure 2.\n \u003C\/span\u003E \n \u003Cp id=\u0022p-19\u0022\u003EAnalysis of an MF-GC connection with a putative single functional release site. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EA\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E shows three sets of 25 consecutive responses at 1.25, 2, and 5 m\u003Cspan class=\u0022sc\u0022\u003Em\u003C\/span\u003E [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E]; stimulus artifacts have been blanked. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EB\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E, Relationship between the mean amplitude of all responses (purple), successes (black), spillover-corrected successes (red), isolated spillover (green), and [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E]. Open triangles indicate the predicted relationship between mean amplitude of EPSC successes (\u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EA\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E) and [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E] assuming \u003Cem\u003EN\u003C\/em\u003E = 1 (tip up) or \u003Cem\u003EN\u003C\/em\u003E = 2 (tip down) from the following: \u003Cspan class=\u0022disp-formula\u0022 id=\u0022disp-formula-7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022highwire-responsive-lazyload\u0022\u003E\u003Cimg src=\u0022data:image\/gif;base64,R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAP\/\/\/yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAIBRAA7\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-embed lazyload\u0022 alt=\u0022Embedded Image\u0022 data-src=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/sites\/default\/files\/highwire\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F2\/embed\/tex-math-8.gif\u0022\/\u003E\u003Cnoscript\u003E\u003Cimg class=\u0022highwire-embed\u0022 alt=\u0022Embedded Image\u0022 src=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/sites\/default\/files\/highwire\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F2\/embed\/tex-math-8.gif\u0022\/\u003E\u003C\/noscript\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E where the failure rate (\u003Cem\u003Ef\u003C\/em\u003E) = 0.87, 0.78, and 0.23 at 1, 2, and 5 m\u003Cspan class=\u0022sc\u0022\u003Em\u003C\/span\u003E [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E], respectively. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EC1\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E shows isolated components of the EPSC and their sum in 2 m\u003Cspan class=\u0022sc\u0022\u003Em\u003C\/span\u003E [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E] (top) and 5 m\u003Cspan class=\u0022sc\u0022\u003Em\u003C\/span\u003E [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E] (bottom). The red traces show the quantal waveform measured at 1.25 m\u003Cspan class=\u0022sc\u0022\u003Em\u003C\/span\u003E [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E]. The green traces show the mean isolated spillover current in the absence of direct release. The blue traces show the linear sum of the spillover and quantal currents, and the black traces show the observed mean successes. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EC2\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E shows the difference between observed and expected current waveforms in \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EC1\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E.\u003C\/p\u003E\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022sb-div caption-clear\u0022\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022highwire-journal-article-marker-end\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cspan id=\u0022related-urls\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022element-fig-data clearfix figure-caption\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022highwire-markup\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv xmlns=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022 id=\u0022content-block-markup\u0022 xmlns:xhtml=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-expansion\u0022 id=\u0022F3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022highwire-journal-article-marker-start\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022highwire-figure\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-inline-img-wrapper\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-inline-img\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F3.large.jpg?width=800\u0026amp;height=600\u0026amp;carousel=1\u0022 title=\u0022Correction for spillover increases the estimated quantal size and decreases the estimated number of release sites at MF-GC synaptic connections. A, Black traces show 10 superimposed consecutive EPSCs collected in 2 mm [Ca2+] (artifact blanked). The gray trace is the average of the isolated spillover responses. bsln indicates the 1 ms window preceding the artifact used to baseline the currents, and t1 and t2 show the measurement windows (0.1 ms) for baseline noise and peak amplitude (at the peak of the direct responses), respectively. B shows current amplitude responses for windows t1 (gray circles) and t2 (black triangles) at each of four different [Ca2+] values (the interval between data sets was actually 3\u0026#x2013;4 min: larger than shown). C shows the average responses at each of the four [Ca2+] values and the average response for isolated spillover currents at three of the [Ca2+] values. D plots the normalized amplitude (D1) and variance (D2) of isolated spillover currents at the time of the peak of the direct response as a function of the mean EPSC normalized to 2mm [Ca2+]. Measurements were grouped by [Ca2+](in mm):1, 1.25, 1.5, 2, and 3\u0026#x2013;8. The smooth curves in D are fits: y=0.12 x0.4 (D1) and y=0.02 x (D2). Each data point is the average of 10\u0026#x2013;29 values, and error bars are SEMs. E shows a variance\u0026#x2013;mean plot for the data illustrated in A\u0026#x2013;C. The solid lines show multinomial fits (Eq. 2) for uncorrected and spillover-corrected data. F shows estimates for the uncorrected and spillover-corrected quantal parameters QP and N for 25 MF-GC connections.\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-images colorbox-load\u0022 rel=\u0022gallery-fragment-images-765194029\u0022 data-figure-caption=\u0022\u0026lt;div class=\u0026quot;highwire-markup\u0026quot;\u0026gt;Correction for spillover increases the estimated quantal size and decreases the estimated number of release sites at MF-GC synaptic connections. A, Black traces show 10 superimposed consecutive EPSCs collected in 2 mm [Ca2+] (artifact blanked). The gray trace is the average of the isolated spillover responses. bsln indicates the 1 ms window preceding the artifact used to baseline the currents, and t1 and t2 show the measurement windows (0.1 ms) for baseline noise and peak amplitude (at the peak of the direct responses), respectively. B shows current amplitude responses for windows t1 (gray circles) and t2 (black triangles) at each of four different [Ca2+] values (the interval between data sets was actually 3\u0026#x2013;4 min: larger than shown). C shows the average responses at each of the four [Ca2+] values and the average response for isolated spillover currents at three of the [Ca2+] values. D plots the normalized amplitude (D1) and variance (D2) of isolated spillover currents at the time of the peak of the direct response as a function of the mean EPSC normalized to 2mm [Ca2+]. Measurements were grouped by [Ca2+](in mm):1, 1.25, 1.5, 2, and 3\u0026#x2013;8. The smooth curves in D are fits: y=0.12 x0.4 (D1) and y=0.02 x (D2). Each data point is the average of 10\u0026#x2013;29 values, and error bars are SEMs. E shows a variance\u0026#x2013;mean plot for the data illustrated in A\u0026#x2013;C. The solid lines show multinomial fits (Eq. 2) for uncorrected and spillover-corrected data. F shows estimates for the uncorrected and spillover-corrected quantal parameters QP and N for 25 MF-GC connections.\u0026lt;\/div\u0026gt;\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022hw-responsive-img\u0022\u003E\u003Cimg class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-image lazyload\u0022 alt=\u0022Figure 3.\u0022 src=\u0022data:image\/gif;base64,R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAP\/\/\/yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAIBRAA7\u0022 data-src=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F3.medium.gif\u0022 width=\u0022344\u0022 height=\u0022440\u0022\/\u003E\u003Cnoscript\u003E\u003Cimg class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-image\u0022 alt=\u0022Figure 3.\u0022 src=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F3.medium.gif\u0022 width=\u0022344\u0022 height=\u0022440\u0022\/\u003E\u003C\/noscript\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cul class=\u0022highwire-figure-links inline\u0022\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022download-fig first\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F3.large.jpg?download=true\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-download\u0022 title=\u0022Download Figure 3.\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EDownload figure\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022new-tab\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F3.large.jpg\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-newtab\u0022 target=\u0022_blank\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EOpen in new tab\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022download-ppt last\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022\/highwire\/powerpoint\/467041\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-ppt\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EDownload powerpoint\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003C\/ul\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-caption\u0022 xmlns:xhtml=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022fig-label\u0022\u003E\n Figure 3.\n \u003C\/span\u003E \n \u003Cp id=\u0022p-25\u0022\u003ECorrection for spillover increases the estimated quantal size and decreases the estimated number of release sites at MF-GC synaptic connections. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EA\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E, Black traces show 10 superimposed consecutive EPSCs collected in 2 m\u003Cspan class=\u0022sc\u0022\u003Em\u003C\/span\u003E [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E] (artifact blanked). The gray trace is the average of the isolated spillover responses. bsln indicates the 1 ms window preceding the artifact used to baseline the currents, and t1 and t2 show the measurement windows (0.1 ms) for baseline noise and peak amplitude (at the peak of the direct responses), respectively. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EB\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E shows current amplitude responses for windows t1 (gray circles) and t2 (black triangles) at each of four different [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E] values (the interval between data sets was actually 3\u20134 min: larger than shown). \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EC\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E shows the average responses at each of the four [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E] values and the average response for isolated spillover currents at three of the [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E] values. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003ED\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E plots the normalized amplitude (\u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003ED1\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E) and variance (\u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003ED2\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E) of isolated spillover currents at the time of the peak of the direct response as a function of the mean EPSC normalized to 2m\u003Cspan class=\u0022sc\u0022\u003Em\u003C\/span\u003E [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E]. Measurements were grouped by [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E](in m\u003Cspan class=\u0022sc\u0022\u003Em\u003C\/span\u003E):1, 1.25, 1.5, 2, and 3\u20138. The smooth curves in \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003ED\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E are fits: \u003Cem\u003Ey\u003C\/em\u003E=0.12 \u003Cem\u003Ex\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Csup\u003E0.4\u003C\/sup\u003E (\u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003ED1\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E) and \u003Cem\u003Ey\u003C\/em\u003E=0.02 \u003Cem\u003Ex\u003C\/em\u003E (\u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003ED2\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E). Each data point is the average of 10\u201329 values, and error bars are SEMs. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EE\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E shows a variance\u2013mean plot for the data illustrated in \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EA\u2013C\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E. The solid lines show multinomial fits (Eq. 2) for uncorrected and spillover-corrected data. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EF\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E shows estimates for the uncorrected and spillover-corrected quantal parameters \u003Cem\u003EQ\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Csub\u003EP\u003C\/sub\u003E and \u003Cem\u003EN\u003C\/em\u003E for 25 MF-GC connections.\u003C\/p\u003E\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022sb-div caption-clear\u0022\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022highwire-journal-article-marker-end\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cspan id=\u0022related-urls\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022element-fig-data clearfix figure-caption\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022highwire-markup\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv xmlns=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022 id=\u0022content-block-markup\u0022 xmlns:xhtml=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-expansion\u0022 id=\u0022F4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022highwire-journal-article-marker-start\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022highwire-figure\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-inline-img-wrapper\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-inline-img\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F4.large.jpg?width=800\u0026amp;height=600\u0026amp;carousel=1\u0022 title=\u0022Fractional block of the EPSC by the rapidly dissociating antagonists kynurenic acid is similar at 2 and 8 mm [Ca2+], suggesting that peak [glutamate] is independent of release probability. A shows the EPSC peak amplitude during an experiment in which 1 mm Kyn was added to the external solution (thin gray bar) and the [Ca2+] was changed from 2 to 8 mm (dashed bar). B1 and B2 show average EPSC size from the four stable epochs indicated by the thick gray bars in A (artifact blanked). B1 shows data in 2 mm [Ca2+] and B2 in 8 mm [Ca2+]. B3 plots records from B1 and B2 normalized to the control peak response. C shows the fractional block of the EPSC by 1 mm Kyn in 2 and 8 mm [Ca2+] across cells. D shows the fractional change in the EPSC amplitude between 2 and 8 mm [Ca2+] in control and 1 mm Kyn. E plots the number of functional release sites (Nest), normalized to control conditions, for control and 1 mm Kyn. Nest was estimated from the ratio of the mean amplitude of the EPSC at 8 mm [Ca2+] and the variance\/mean of EPSCs recorded in 1.25 mm [Ca2+], in control conditions or in Kyn. Because release probability at 8 mm [Ca2+] is \u0026#x2248;1 (see Results), this gives an estimate of N.\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-images colorbox-load\u0022 rel=\u0022gallery-fragment-images-765194029\u0022 data-figure-caption=\u0022\u0026lt;div class=\u0026quot;highwire-markup\u0026quot;\u0026gt;Fractional block of the EPSC by the rapidly dissociating antagonists kynurenic acid is similar at 2 and 8 mm [Ca2+], suggesting that peak [glutamate] is independent of release probability. A shows the EPSC peak amplitude during an experiment in which 1 mm Kyn was added to the external solution (thin gray bar) and the [Ca2+] was changed from 2 to 8 mm (dashed bar). B1 and B2 show average EPSC size from the four stable epochs indicated by the thick gray bars in A (artifact blanked). B1 shows data in 2 mm [Ca2+] and B2 in 8 mm [Ca2+]. B3 plots records from B1 and B2 normalized to the control peak response. C shows the fractional block of the EPSC by 1 mm Kyn in 2 and 8 mm [Ca2+] across cells. D shows the fractional change in the EPSC amplitude between 2 and 8 mm [Ca2+] in control and 1 mm Kyn. E plots the number of functional release sites (Nest), normalized to control conditions, for control and 1 mm Kyn. Nest was estimated from the ratio of the mean amplitude of the EPSC at 8 mm [Ca2+] and the variance\/mean of EPSCs recorded in 1.25 mm [Ca2+], in control conditions or in Kyn. Because release probability at 8 mm [Ca2+] is \u0026#x2248;1 (see Results), this gives an estimate of N.\u0026lt;\/div\u0026gt;\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022hw-responsive-img\u0022\u003E\u003Cimg class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-image lazyload\u0022 alt=\u0022Figure 4.\u0022 src=\u0022data:image\/gif;base64,R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAP\/\/\/yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAIBRAA7\u0022 data-src=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F4.medium.gif\u0022 width=\u0022422\u0022 height=\u0022440\u0022\/\u003E\u003Cnoscript\u003E\u003Cimg class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-image\u0022 alt=\u0022Figure 4.\u0022 src=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F4.medium.gif\u0022 width=\u0022422\u0022 height=\u0022440\u0022\/\u003E\u003C\/noscript\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cul class=\u0022highwire-figure-links inline\u0022\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022download-fig first\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F4.large.jpg?download=true\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-download\u0022 title=\u0022Download Figure 4.\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EDownload figure\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022new-tab\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F4.large.jpg\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-newtab\u0022 target=\u0022_blank\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EOpen in new tab\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022download-ppt last\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022\/highwire\/powerpoint\/467043\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-ppt\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EDownload powerpoint\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003C\/ul\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-caption\u0022 xmlns:xhtml=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022fig-label\u0022\u003E\n Figure 4.\n \u003C\/span\u003E \n \u003Cp id=\u0022p-28\u0022\u003EFractional block of the EPSC by the rapidly dissociating antagonists kynurenic acid is similar at 2 and 8 m\u003Cspan class=\u0022sc\u0022\u003Em\u003C\/span\u003E [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E], suggesting that peak [glutamate] is independent of release probability. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EA\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E shows the EPSC peak amplitude during an experiment in which 1 m\u003Cspan class=\u0022sc\u0022\u003Em\u003C\/span\u003E Kyn was added to the external solution (thin gray bar) and the [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E] was changed from 2 to 8 m\u003Cspan class=\u0022sc\u0022\u003Em\u003C\/span\u003E (dashed bar). \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EB1\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E and \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EB2\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E show average EPSC size from the four stable epochs indicated by the thick gray bars in \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EA\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E (artifact blanked). \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EB1\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E shows data in 2 m\u003Cspan class=\u0022sc\u0022\u003Em\u003C\/span\u003E [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E] and \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EB2\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E in 8 m\u003Cspan class=\u0022sc\u0022\u003Em\u003C\/span\u003E [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E]. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EB3\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E plots records from \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EB1\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E and \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EB2\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E normalized to the control peak response. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EC\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E shows the fractional block of the EPSC by 1 m\u003Cspan class=\u0022sc\u0022\u003Em\u003C\/span\u003E Kyn in 2 and 8 m\u003Cspan class=\u0022sc\u0022\u003Em\u003C\/span\u003E [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E] across cells. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003ED\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E shows the fractional change in the EPSC amplitude between 2 and 8 m\u003Cspan class=\u0022sc\u0022\u003Em\u003C\/span\u003E [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E] in control and 1 m\u003Cspan class=\u0022sc\u0022\u003Em\u003C\/span\u003E Kyn. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EE\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E plots the number of functional release sites (\u003Cem\u003EN\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Csub\u003Eest\u003C\/sub\u003E), normalized to control conditions, for control and 1 m\u003Cspan class=\u0022sc\u0022\u003Em\u003C\/span\u003E Kyn. \u003Cem\u003EN\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Csub\u003Eest\u003C\/sub\u003E was estimated from the ratio of the mean amplitude of the EPSC at 8 m\u003Cspan class=\u0022sc\u0022\u003Em\u003C\/span\u003E [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E] and the variance\/mean of EPSCs recorded in 1.25 m\u003Cspan class=\u0022sc\u0022\u003Em\u003C\/span\u003E [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E], in control conditions or in Kyn. Because release probability at 8 m\u003Cspan class=\u0022sc\u0022\u003Em\u003C\/span\u003E [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E] is \u22481 (see Results), this gives an estimate of \u003Cem\u003EN\u003C\/em\u003E.\u003C\/p\u003E\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022sb-div caption-clear\u0022\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022highwire-journal-article-marker-end\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cspan id=\u0022related-urls\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022element-fig-data clearfix figure-caption\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022highwire-markup\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv xmlns=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022 id=\u0022content-block-markup\u0022 xmlns:xhtml=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-expansion\u0022 id=\u0022F5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022highwire-journal-article-marker-start\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022highwire-figure\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-inline-img-wrapper\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-inline-img\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F5.large.jpg?width=800\u0026amp;height=600\u0026amp;carousel=1\u0022 title=\u0022Quantal parameters vary independently across MF-GC synaptic connections. A shows the relationship between QP and N; B shows the relationship between PR at 2 mm [Ca2+] and N; and C shows the relationship between QP and PR at 2 mm [Ca2+]. All plots show quantal parameters from 25 connections measured using spillover-corrected MPFA. In no instance were the parameters significantly correlated with one another (0.14 \u0026lt; p \u0026lt; 0.68). obs., Observations. D shows that the peak spillover current amplitude, I (spill_peak), normalized by NQP, is significantly correlated with PR across MF connections. Dividing the spillover current amplitude by NQP accounts for cell-to-cell differences in the number of AMPARs that detect the spillover current.\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-images colorbox-load\u0022 rel=\u0022gallery-fragment-images-765194029\u0022 data-figure-caption=\u0022\u0026lt;div class=\u0026quot;highwire-markup\u0026quot;\u0026gt;Quantal parameters vary independently across MF-GC synaptic connections. A shows the relationship between QP and N; B shows the relationship between PR at 2 mm [Ca2+] and N; and C shows the relationship between QP and PR at 2 mm [Ca2+]. All plots show quantal parameters from 25 connections measured using spillover-corrected MPFA. In no instance were the parameters significantly correlated with one another (0.14 \u0026lt; p \u0026lt; 0.68). obs., Observations. D shows that the peak spillover current amplitude, I (spill_peak), normalized by NQP, is significantly correlated with PR across MF connections. Dividing the spillover current amplitude by NQP accounts for cell-to-cell differences in the number of AMPARs that detect the spillover current.\u0026lt;\/div\u0026gt;\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022hw-responsive-img\u0022\u003E\u003Cimg class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-image lazyload\u0022 alt=\u0022Figure 5.\u0022 src=\u0022data:image\/gif;base64,R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAP\/\/\/yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAIBRAA7\u0022 data-src=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F5.medium.gif\u0022 width=\u0022440\u0022 height=\u0022364\u0022\/\u003E\u003Cnoscript\u003E\u003Cimg class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-image\u0022 alt=\u0022Figure 5.\u0022 src=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F5.medium.gif\u0022 width=\u0022440\u0022 height=\u0022364\u0022\/\u003E\u003C\/noscript\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cul class=\u0022highwire-figure-links inline\u0022\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022download-fig first\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F5.large.jpg?download=true\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-download\u0022 title=\u0022Download Figure 5.\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EDownload figure\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022new-tab\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F5.large.jpg\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-newtab\u0022 target=\u0022_blank\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EOpen in new tab\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022download-ppt last\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022\/highwire\/powerpoint\/467045\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-ppt\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EDownload powerpoint\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003C\/ul\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-caption\u0022 xmlns:xhtml=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022fig-label\u0022\u003E\n Figure 5.\n \u003C\/span\u003E \n \u003Cp id=\u0022p-32\u0022\u003EQuantal parameters vary independently across MF-GC synaptic connections. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EA\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E shows the relationship between \u003Cem\u003EQ\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Csub\u003EP\u003C\/sub\u003E and \u003Cem\u003EN\u003C\/em\u003E; \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EB\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E shows the relationship between \u003Cem\u003EP\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Csub\u003ER\u003C\/sub\u003E at 2 m\u003Cspan class=\u0022sc\u0022\u003Em\u003C\/span\u003E [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E] and \u003Cem\u003EN\u003C\/em\u003E; and \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EC\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E shows the relationship between \u003Cem\u003EQ\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Csub\u003EP\u003C\/sub\u003E and \u003Cem\u003EP\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Csub\u003ER\u003C\/sub\u003E at 2 m\u003Cspan class=\u0022sc\u0022\u003Em\u003C\/span\u003E [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E]. All plots show quantal parameters from 25 connections measured using spillover-corrected MPFA. In no instance were the parameters significantly correlated with one another (0.14 \u0026lt; \u003Cem\u003Ep\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026lt; 0.68). obs., Observations. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003ED\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E shows that the peak spillover current amplitude, \u003Cem\u003EI\u003C\/em\u003E (spill_peak), normalized by \u003Cem\u003ENQ\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Csub\u003EP\u003C\/sub\u003E, is significantly correlated with \u003Cem\u003EP\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Csub\u003ER\u003C\/sub\u003E across MF connections. Dividing the spillover current amplitude by \u003Cem\u003ENQ\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Csub\u003EP\u003C\/sub\u003E accounts for cell-to-cell differences in the number of AMPARs that detect the spillover current.\u003C\/p\u003E\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022sb-div caption-clear\u0022\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022highwire-journal-article-marker-end\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cspan id=\u0022related-urls\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022element-fig-data clearfix figure-caption\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022highwire-markup\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv xmlns=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022 id=\u0022content-block-markup\u0022 xmlns:xhtml=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-expansion\u0022 id=\u0022F6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022highwire-journal-article-marker-start\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022highwire-figure\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-inline-img-wrapper\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-inline-img\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F6.large.jpg?width=800\u0026amp;height=600\u0026amp;carousel=1\u0022 title=\u0022The time course of vesicular release at single-site MF-GC connections is similar at different [Ca2+] values. A, A total of 24 fits of consecutive EPSCs (Eq. 1) from a set of 382 successes recorded from a single-site synapse at 5 mm [Ca2+]. The inset shows an expanded view on the same time base as the distribution of all 382 latencies, shown in B. EPSC latency was measured at the 20% rise time of the fits. The smooth green line shows a Gaussian fit with an SD of 70 \u0026#x3BC;s; the magenta segment of this line shows the 0.1 ms window corresponding to the peak of the direct response. C shows cumulative release functions for three [Ca2+] values (open triangles), calculated from the latency distribution and normalized by the number of stimuli. This gives PR(t). The solid lines show the cumulative release functions calculated from the mean spillover-corrected waveform and the quantal waveform using deconvolution. D shows the data in C but normalized to the peak of the direct response; the distributions are similar (p = 0.69\u0026#x2013;0.91 by pairwise Kolmogorov\u0026#x2013;Smirnov tests). The cumulative function derived from the 1.25 mm [Ca2+] run was moved 0.05 ms to right to align the curves to account for presumed differences in fiber excitability (see Results).\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-images colorbox-load\u0022 rel=\u0022gallery-fragment-images-765194029\u0022 data-figure-caption=\u0022\u0026lt;div class=\u0026quot;highwire-markup\u0026quot;\u0026gt;The time course of vesicular release at single-site MF-GC connections is similar at different [Ca2+] values. A, A total of 24 fits of consecutive EPSCs (Eq. 1) from a set of 382 successes recorded from a single-site synapse at 5 mm [Ca2+]. The inset shows an expanded view on the same time base as the distribution of all 382 latencies, shown in B. EPSC latency was measured at the 20% rise time of the fits. The smooth green line shows a Gaussian fit with an SD of 70 \u0026#x3BC;s; the magenta segment of this line shows the 0.1 ms window corresponding to the peak of the direct response. C shows cumulative release functions for three [Ca2+] values (open triangles), calculated from the latency distribution and normalized by the number of stimuli. This gives PR(t). The solid lines show the cumulative release functions calculated from the mean spillover-corrected waveform and the quantal waveform using deconvolution. D shows the data in C but normalized to the peak of the direct response; the distributions are similar (p = 0.69\u0026#x2013;0.91 by pairwise Kolmogorov\u0026#x2013;Smirnov tests). The cumulative function derived from the 1.25 mm [Ca2+] run was moved 0.05 ms to right to align the curves to account for presumed differences in fiber excitability (see Results).\u0026lt;\/div\u0026gt;\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022hw-responsive-img\u0022\u003E\u003Cimg class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-image lazyload\u0022 alt=\u0022Figure 6.\u0022 src=\u0022data:image\/gif;base64,R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAP\/\/\/yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAIBRAA7\u0022 data-src=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F6.medium.gif\u0022 width=\u0022440\u0022 height=\u0022282\u0022\/\u003E\u003Cnoscript\u003E\u003Cimg class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-image\u0022 alt=\u0022Figure 6.\u0022 src=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F6.medium.gif\u0022 width=\u0022440\u0022 height=\u0022282\u0022\/\u003E\u003C\/noscript\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cul class=\u0022highwire-figure-links inline\u0022\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022download-fig first\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F6.large.jpg?download=true\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-download\u0022 title=\u0022Download Figure 6.\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EDownload figure\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022new-tab\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F6.large.jpg\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-newtab\u0022 target=\u0022_blank\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EOpen in new tab\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022download-ppt last\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022\/highwire\/powerpoint\/467047\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-ppt\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EDownload powerpoint\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003C\/ul\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-caption\u0022 xmlns:xhtml=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022fig-label\u0022\u003E\n Figure 6.\n \u003C\/span\u003E \n \u003Cp id=\u0022p-36\u0022\u003EThe time course of vesicular release at single-site MF-GC connections is similar at different [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E] values. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EA\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E, A total of 24 fits of consecutive EPSCs (Eq. 1) from a set of 382 successes recorded from a single-site synapse at 5 m\u003Cspan class=\u0022sc\u0022\u003Em\u003C\/span\u003E [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E]. The inset shows an expanded view on the same time base as the distribution of all 382 latencies, shown in \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EB\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E. EPSC latency was measured at the 20% rise time of the fits. The smooth green line shows a Gaussian fit with an SD of 70 \u03bcs; the magenta segment of this line shows the 0.1 ms window corresponding to the peak of the direct response. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EC\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E shows cumulative release functions for three [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E] values (open triangles), calculated from the latency distribution and normalized by the number of stimuli. This gives \u003Cem\u003EP\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Csub\u003ER\u003C\/sub\u003E(\u003Cem\u003Et\u003C\/em\u003E). The solid lines show the cumulative release functions calculated from the mean spillover-corrected waveform and the quantal waveform using deconvolution. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003ED\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E shows the data in \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EC\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E but normalized to the peak of the direct response; the distributions are similar (\u003Cem\u003Ep\u003C\/em\u003E = 0.69\u20130.91 by pairwise Kolmogorov\u2013Smirnov tests). The cumulative function derived from the 1.25 m\u003Cspan class=\u0022sc\u0022\u003Em\u003C\/span\u003E [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E] run was moved 0.05 ms to right to align the curves to account for presumed differences in fiber excitability (see Results).\u003C\/p\u003E\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022sb-div caption-clear\u0022\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022highwire-journal-article-marker-end\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cspan id=\u0022related-urls\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022element-fig-data clearfix figure-caption\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022highwire-markup\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv xmlns=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022 id=\u0022content-block-markup\u0022 xmlns:xhtml=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-expansion\u0022 id=\u0022F7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022highwire-journal-article-marker-start\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022highwire-figure\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-inline-img-wrapper\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-inline-img\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F7.large.jpg?width=800\u0026amp;height=600\u0026amp;carousel=1\u0022 title=\u0022The time course of the probability of vesicular release estimated with deconvolution at MF-GC connections with multiple release sites. A, A total of 24 consecutive responses to MF stimulation in 1.25 mm [Ca2+] (4 successes). B, Fit of Equation 1 to the rise-aligned mean quantal waveform (for details, see Materials and Methods). C, The average EPSC (black), average isolated spillover current (gray), and the fit of the spillover-corrected EPSC (dashed) for three [Ca2+] values. D shows the deconvolved vesicular release time course for the uncorrected and spillover-corrected data at 2 mm [Ca2+]. The thickened segments show the time of the 0.1 ms window at the peak of the direct response. E shows vesicular release probability as a function of time for spillover-corrected EPSCs at three [Ca2+] values for this connection, which had an N = 2.2. The thickened gray portion of the traces show the 0.1 ms peak of the direct response (the small shifts in peak times are related to differences in latency in different [Ca2+] that are likely to be attributable to differences in fiber excitability; see Results). F shows the data in E normalized at the peak of the direct response. When the cumulative waveforms were aligned on their 50% rise (F, inset), their distributions were similar (p = 0.99\u0026#x2013;1.00 by pairwise Kolmogorov\u0026#x2013;Smirnov tests).\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-images colorbox-load\u0022 rel=\u0022gallery-fragment-images-765194029\u0022 data-figure-caption=\u0022\u0026lt;div class=\u0026quot;highwire-markup\u0026quot;\u0026gt;The time course of the probability of vesicular release estimated with deconvolution at MF-GC connections with multiple release sites. A, A total of 24 consecutive responses to MF stimulation in 1.25 mm [Ca2+] (4 successes). B, Fit of Equation 1 to the rise-aligned mean quantal waveform (for details, see Materials and Methods). C, The average EPSC (black), average isolated spillover current (gray), and the fit of the spillover-corrected EPSC (dashed) for three [Ca2+] values. D shows the deconvolved vesicular release time course for the uncorrected and spillover-corrected data at 2 mm [Ca2+]. The thickened segments show the time of the 0.1 ms window at the peak of the direct response. E shows vesicular release probability as a function of time for spillover-corrected EPSCs at three [Ca2+] values for this connection, which had an N = 2.2. The thickened gray portion of the traces show the 0.1 ms peak of the direct response (the small shifts in peak times are related to differences in latency in different [Ca2+] that are likely to be attributable to differences in fiber excitability; see Results). F shows the data in E normalized at the peak of the direct response. When the cumulative waveforms were aligned on their 50% rise (F, inset), their distributions were similar (p = 0.99\u0026#x2013;1.00 by pairwise Kolmogorov\u0026#x2013;Smirnov tests).\u0026lt;\/div\u0026gt;\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022hw-responsive-img\u0022\u003E\u003Cimg class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-image lazyload\u0022 alt=\u0022Figure 7.\u0022 src=\u0022data:image\/gif;base64,R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAP\/\/\/yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAIBRAA7\u0022 data-src=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F7.medium.gif\u0022 width=\u0022404\u0022 height=\u0022440\u0022\/\u003E\u003Cnoscript\u003E\u003Cimg class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-image\u0022 alt=\u0022Figure 7.\u0022 src=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F7.medium.gif\u0022 width=\u0022404\u0022 height=\u0022440\u0022\/\u003E\u003C\/noscript\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cul class=\u0022highwire-figure-links inline\u0022\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022download-fig first\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F7.large.jpg?download=true\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-download\u0022 title=\u0022Download Figure 7.\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EDownload figure\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022new-tab\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F7.large.jpg\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-newtab\u0022 target=\u0022_blank\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EOpen in new tab\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022download-ppt last\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022\/highwire\/powerpoint\/467050\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-ppt\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EDownload powerpoint\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003C\/ul\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-caption\u0022 xmlns:xhtml=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022fig-label\u0022\u003E\n Figure 7.\n \u003C\/span\u003E \n \u003Cp id=\u0022p-41\u0022\u003EThe time course of the probability of vesicular release estimated with deconvolution at MF-GC connections with multiple release sites. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EA\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E, A total of 24 consecutive responses to MF stimulation in 1.25 m\u003Cspan class=\u0022sc\u0022\u003Em\u003C\/span\u003E [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E] (4 successes). \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EB\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E, Fit of Equation 1 to the rise-aligned mean quantal waveform (for details, see Materials and Methods). \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EC\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E, The average EPSC (black), average isolated spillover current (gray), and the fit of the spillover-corrected EPSC (dashed) for three [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E] values. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003ED\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E shows the deconvolved vesicular release time course for the uncorrected and spillover-corrected data at 2 m\u003Cspan class=\u0022sc\u0022\u003Em\u003C\/span\u003E [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E]. The thickened segments show the time of the 0.1 ms window at the peak of the direct response. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EE\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E shows vesicular release probability as a function of time for spillover-corrected EPSCs at three [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E] values for this connection, which had an \u003Cem\u003EN\u003C\/em\u003E = 2.2. The thickened gray portion of the traces show the 0.1 ms peak of the direct response (the small shifts in peak times are related to differences in latency in different [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E] that are likely to be attributable to differences in fiber excitability; see Results). \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EF\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E shows the data in \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EE\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E normalized at the peak of the direct response. When the cumulative waveforms were aligned on their 50% rise (\u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EF\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E, inset), their distributions were similar (\u003Cem\u003Ep\u003C\/em\u003E = 0.99\u20131.00 by pairwise Kolmogorov\u2013Smirnov tests).\u003C\/p\u003E\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022sb-div caption-clear\u0022\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022highwire-journal-article-marker-end\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cspan id=\u0022related-urls\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022element-fig-data clearfix figure-caption\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022highwire-markup\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv xmlns=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022 id=\u0022content-block-markup\u0022 xmlns:xhtml=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-expansion\u0022 id=\u0022F8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022highwire-journal-article-marker-start\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022highwire-figure\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-inline-img-wrapper\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-inline-img\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F8.large.jpg?width=800\u0026amp;height=600\u0026amp;carousel=1\u0022 title=\u0022The time course of the vesicular release rate per site at MF-GC connections and its independence of [Ca2+] and PR. A shows the average time course of vesicular release rate per release site estimated with deconvolution and MPFA from 14 MF-GC connections. The FWHM of the release function is 0.155 ms, and 80% of the release occurs within 0.20 ms. B shows the relationship between the FWHM of the release function, normalized to its value in 2 mm [Ca2+] for each cell and [Ca2+]. The solid line shows regression fit. C shows the relationship between the FWHM of the vesicular release function and PR, calculated from MPFA across 47 different [Ca2+] runs from 14 connections. Solid line shows regression fit.\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-images colorbox-load\u0022 rel=\u0022gallery-fragment-images-765194029\u0022 data-figure-caption=\u0022\u0026lt;div class=\u0026quot;highwire-markup\u0026quot;\u0026gt;The time course of the vesicular release rate per site at MF-GC connections and its independence of [Ca2+] and PR. A shows the average time course of vesicular release rate per release site estimated with deconvolution and MPFA from 14 MF-GC connections. The FWHM of the release function is 0.155 ms, and 80% of the release occurs within 0.20 ms. B shows the relationship between the FWHM of the release function, normalized to its value in 2 mm [Ca2+] for each cell and [Ca2+]. The solid line shows regression fit. C shows the relationship between the FWHM of the vesicular release function and PR, calculated from MPFA across 47 different [Ca2+] runs from 14 connections. Solid line shows regression fit.\u0026lt;\/div\u0026gt;\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022hw-responsive-img\u0022\u003E\u003Cimg class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-image lazyload\u0022 alt=\u0022Figure 8.\u0022 src=\u0022data:image\/gif;base64,R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAP\/\/\/yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAIBRAA7\u0022 data-src=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F8.medium.gif\u0022 width=\u0022440\u0022 height=\u0022132\u0022\/\u003E\u003Cnoscript\u003E\u003Cimg class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-image\u0022 alt=\u0022Figure 8.\u0022 src=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F8.medium.gif\u0022 width=\u0022440\u0022 height=\u0022132\u0022\/\u003E\u003C\/noscript\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cul class=\u0022highwire-figure-links inline\u0022\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022download-fig first\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F8.large.jpg?download=true\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-download\u0022 title=\u0022Download Figure 8.\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EDownload figure\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022new-tab\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F8.large.jpg\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-newtab\u0022 target=\u0022_blank\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EOpen in new tab\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022download-ppt last\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022\/highwire\/powerpoint\/467052\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-ppt\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EDownload powerpoint\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003C\/ul\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-caption\u0022 xmlns:xhtml=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022fig-label\u0022\u003E\n Figure 8.\n \u003C\/span\u003E \n \u003Cp id=\u0022p-43\u0022\u003EThe time course of the vesicular release rate per site at MF-GC connections and its independence of [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E] and \u003Cem\u003EP\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Csub\u003ER\u003C\/sub\u003E. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EA\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E shows the average time course of vesicular release rate per release site estimated with deconvolution and MPFA from 14 MF-GC connections. The FWHM of the release function is 0.155 ms, and 80% of the release occurs within 0.20 ms. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EB\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E shows the relationship between the FWHM of the release function, normalized to its value in 2 m\u003Cspan class=\u0022sc\u0022\u003Em\u003C\/span\u003E [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E] for each cell and [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E]. The solid line shows regression fit. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EC\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E shows the relationship between the FWHM of the vesicular release function and \u003Cem\u003EP\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Csub\u003ER\u003C\/sub\u003E, calculated from MPFA across 47 different [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E] runs from 14 connections. Solid line shows regression fit.\u003C\/p\u003E\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022sb-div caption-clear\u0022\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022highwire-journal-article-marker-end\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cspan id=\u0022related-urls\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022element-fig-data clearfix figure-caption\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022highwire-markup\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv xmlns=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022 id=\u0022content-block-markup\u0022 xmlns:xhtml=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-expansion\u0022 id=\u0022F9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022highwire-journal-article-marker-start\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022highwire-figure\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-inline-img-wrapper\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-inline-img\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F9.large.jpg?width=800\u0026amp;height=600\u0026amp;carousel=1\u0022 title=\u0022Simulations closely approximate the trial-to-trial variability in EPSC amplitude and shape. A compares the mean EPSC (top) and SD (bottom) calculated from a sample of 96 EPSCs measured from an MF-GC synaptic connection (black line) and the mean EPSC and SD calculated from a sample of 1000 simulated EPSCs for this connection (gray line). The quantal parameters for this connection, N = 5 and PR = 0.46 at 2 mm [Ca2+], are similar to the population mean. B\u0026#x2013;D compare real and simulated EPSCs for their peak amplitudes (0.1 ms window; B), weighted decay (C), and charge transfer (D).\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-images colorbox-load\u0022 rel=\u0022gallery-fragment-images-765194029\u0022 data-figure-caption=\u0022\u0026lt;div class=\u0026quot;highwire-markup\u0026quot;\u0026gt;Simulations closely approximate the trial-to-trial variability in EPSC amplitude and shape. A compares the mean EPSC (top) and SD (bottom) calculated from a sample of 96 EPSCs measured from an MF-GC synaptic connection (black line) and the mean EPSC and SD calculated from a sample of 1000 simulated EPSCs for this connection (gray line). The quantal parameters for this connection, N = 5 and PR = 0.46 at 2 mm [Ca2+], are similar to the population mean. B\u0026#x2013;D compare real and simulated EPSCs for their peak amplitudes (0.1 ms window; B), weighted decay (C), and charge transfer (D).\u0026lt;\/div\u0026gt;\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022hw-responsive-img\u0022\u003E\u003Cimg class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-image lazyload\u0022 alt=\u0022Figure 9.\u0022 src=\u0022data:image\/gif;base64,R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAP\/\/\/yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAIBRAA7\u0022 data-src=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F9.medium.gif\u0022 width=\u0022440\u0022 height=\u0022284\u0022\/\u003E\u003Cnoscript\u003E\u003Cimg class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-image\u0022 alt=\u0022Figure 9.\u0022 src=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F9.medium.gif\u0022 width=\u0022440\u0022 height=\u0022284\u0022\/\u003E\u003C\/noscript\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cul class=\u0022highwire-figure-links inline\u0022\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022download-fig first\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F9.large.jpg?download=true\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-download\u0022 title=\u0022Download Figure 9.\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EDownload figure\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022new-tab\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F9.large.jpg\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-newtab\u0022 target=\u0022_blank\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EOpen in new tab\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022download-ppt last\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022\/highwire\/powerpoint\/467054\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-ppt\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EDownload powerpoint\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003C\/ul\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-caption\u0022 xmlns:xhtml=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022fig-label\u0022\u003E\n Figure 9.\n \u003C\/span\u003E \n \u003Cp id=\u0022p-45\u0022\u003ESimulations closely approximate the trial-to-trial variability in EPSC amplitude and shape. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EA\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E compares the mean EPSC (top) and SD (bottom) calculated from a sample of 96 EPSCs measured from an MF-GC synaptic connection (black line) and the mean EPSC and SD calculated from a sample of 1000 simulated EPSCs for this connection (gray line). The quantal parameters for this connection, \u003Cem\u003EN\u003C\/em\u003E = 5 and \u003Cem\u003EP\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Csub\u003ER\u003C\/sub\u003E = 0.46 at 2 m\u003Cspan class=\u0022sc\u0022\u003Em\u003C\/span\u003E [Ca\u003Csup\u003E2+\u003C\/sup\u003E], are similar to the population mean. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EB\u2013D\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E compare real and simulated EPSCs for their peak amplitudes (0.1 ms window; \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EB\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E), weighted decay (\u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EC\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E), and charge transfer (\u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003ED\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E).\u003C\/p\u003E\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022sb-div caption-clear\u0022\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022highwire-journal-article-marker-end\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cspan id=\u0022related-urls\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022element-fig-data clearfix figure-caption\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022highwire-markup\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv xmlns=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022 id=\u0022content-block-markup\u0022 xmlns:xhtml=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-expansion\u0022 id=\u0022F10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022highwire-journal-article-marker-start\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022highwire-figure\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-inline-img-wrapper\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-inline-img\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F10.large.jpg?width=800\u0026amp;height=600\u0026amp;carousel=1\u0022 title=\u0022Simulations suggest that quantal variance smoothes spike threshold by extending the range of voltages from which EPSPs can cross threshold. A1, Simulated EPSCs at \u0026#x2013;76 mV for a single-site connection with PR = 0.22 with no quantal variance and no spillover. Gray traces show 50 individual EPSCs and failures, and the black trace is the average (the majority of the responses were failures). A2 shows simulated EPSPs for the same currents as in A1 for a passive single-compartment model with a baseline membrane potential of \u0026#x2013;52 mV. The dashed line shows an arbitrary threshold voltage of \u0026#x2013;50 mV. B1 shows EPSCs for the same connection but with quantal variance under the same conditions as A1 (CVQS = 0.26). B2 shows simulated EPSPs for the same currents as in B1 for the same model and conditions as in A2. C shows PV \u0026gt; Vthreshold as a function of the baseline voltage; each symbol represents the probability over 1000 trials; filled circles show the relationship with no quantal variance, and open triangles show the relationship in the presence of quantal variance. D shows the relationship between the SD of the times at which the EPSP crossed the \u0026#x2013;50 mV threshold and the baseline voltage. Each symbol represents the SD calculated over 1000 trials.\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-images colorbox-load\u0022 rel=\u0022gallery-fragment-images-765194029\u0022 data-figure-caption=\u0022\u0026lt;div class=\u0026quot;highwire-markup\u0026quot;\u0026gt;Simulations suggest that quantal variance smoothes spike threshold by extending the range of voltages from which EPSPs can cross threshold. A1, Simulated EPSCs at \u0026#x2013;76 mV for a single-site connection with PR = 0.22 with no quantal variance and no spillover. Gray traces show 50 individual EPSCs and failures, and the black trace is the average (the majority of the responses were failures). A2 shows simulated EPSPs for the same currents as in A1 for a passive single-compartment model with a baseline membrane potential of \u0026#x2013;52 mV. The dashed line shows an arbitrary threshold voltage of \u0026#x2013;50 mV. B1 shows EPSCs for the same connection but with quantal variance under the same conditions as A1 (CVQS = 0.26). B2 shows simulated EPSPs for the same currents as in B1 for the same model and conditions as in A2. C shows PV \u0026gt; Vthreshold as a function of the baseline voltage; each symbol represents the probability over 1000 trials; filled circles show the relationship with no quantal variance, and open triangles show the relationship in the presence of quantal variance. D shows the relationship between the SD of the times at which the EPSP crossed the \u0026#x2013;50 mV threshold and the baseline voltage. Each symbol represents the SD calculated over 1000 trials.\u0026lt;\/div\u0026gt;\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022hw-responsive-img\u0022\u003E\u003Cimg class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-image lazyload\u0022 alt=\u0022Figure 10.\u0022 src=\u0022data:image\/gif;base64,R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAP\/\/\/yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAIBRAA7\u0022 data-src=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F10.medium.gif\u0022 width=\u0022440\u0022 height=\u0022428\u0022\/\u003E\u003Cnoscript\u003E\u003Cimg class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-image\u0022 alt=\u0022Figure 10.\u0022 src=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F10.medium.gif\u0022 width=\u0022440\u0022 height=\u0022428\u0022\/\u003E\u003C\/noscript\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cul class=\u0022highwire-figure-links inline\u0022\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022download-fig first\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F10.large.jpg?download=true\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-download\u0022 title=\u0022Download Figure 10.\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EDownload figure\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022new-tab\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F10.large.jpg\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-newtab\u0022 target=\u0022_blank\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EOpen in new tab\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022download-ppt last\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022\/highwire\/powerpoint\/467032\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-ppt\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EDownload powerpoint\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003C\/ul\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-caption\u0022 xmlns:xhtml=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022fig-label\u0022\u003E\n Figure 10.\n \u003C\/span\u003E \n \u003Cp id=\u0022p-51\u0022\u003ESimulations suggest that quantal variance smoothes spike threshold by extending the range of voltages from which EPSPs can cross threshold. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EA1\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E, Simulated EPSCs at \u201376 mV for a single-site connection with \u003Cem\u003EP\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Csub\u003ER\u003C\/sub\u003E = 0.22 with no quantal variance and no spillover. Gray traces show 50 individual EPSCs and failures, and the black trace is the average (the majority of the responses were failures). \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EA2\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E shows simulated EPSPs for the same currents as in \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EA1\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E for a passive single-compartment model with a baseline membrane potential of \u201352 mV. The dashed line shows an arbitrary threshold voltage of \u201350 mV. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EB1\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E shows EPSCs for the same connection but with quantal variance under the same conditions as \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EA1\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E (CV\u003Csub\u003EQS\u003C\/sub\u003E = 0.26). \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EB2\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E shows simulated EPSPs for the same currents as in \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EB1\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E for the same model and conditions as in \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EA2. C\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E shows \u003Cem\u003EP\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Csub\u003E\u003Cem\u003EV\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026gt; \u003Cem\u003EV\u003C\/em\u003Ethreshold\u003C\/sub\u003E as a function of the baseline voltage; each symbol represents the probability over 1000 trials; filled circles show the relationship with no quantal variance, and open triangles show the relationship in the presence of quantal variance. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003ED\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E shows the relationship between the SD of the times at which the EPSP crossed the \u201350 mV threshold and the baseline voltage. Each symbol represents the SD calculated over 1000 trials.\u003C\/p\u003E\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022sb-div caption-clear\u0022\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022highwire-journal-article-marker-end\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cspan id=\u0022related-urls\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022last\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022element-fig-data clearfix figure-caption\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022highwire-markup\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv xmlns=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022 id=\u0022content-block-markup\u0022 xmlns:xhtml=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-expansion\u0022 id=\u0022F11\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022highwire-journal-article-marker-start\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022highwire-figure\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-inline-img-wrapper\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-inline-img\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F11.large.jpg?width=800\u0026amp;height=600\u0026amp;carousel=1\u0022 title=\u0022Simulations suggest that spillover currents increase the reliability of MF signaling. Simulated EPSCs with quantal variance and spillover at \u0026#x2013;76 mV for three different MF-GC synaptic connections with mean amplitudes that were small (A1; N = 1, PR = 0.22, and QP =\u0026#x2013;14.7 pA), similar to the mean (B1; N = 5, PR = 0.46, and QP =\u0026#x2013;16.7 pA), and large (C1; N = 9, PR = 0.42, and QP =\u0026#x2013;16.5 pA). Values for quantal variability were CVQS = 0.26 and CVQII = 0.31. The gray traces in each panel show 30 individual EPSCs and failures; the black trace is the average. A2, B2, and C2 show simulated EPSPs for the same currents as in A1, B1, and C1 for a passive single-compartment model with a baseline membrane potential of \u0026#x2013;76 mV. A3, B3, and C3 show PV \u0026gt; Vthreshold as a function of the baseline voltage for the connections simulated above. Each symbol represents the probability over 1000 trials; filled circles show the relationship without spillover, and open triangles show the relationship in the presence of spillover. A4, B4, and C4 show the relationship between the SD of the times when the EPSC crossed a \u0026#x2013;50 mV threshold and the baseline voltage; each symbol represents the SD calculated over 1000 trials.\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-images colorbox-load\u0022 rel=\u0022gallery-fragment-images-765194029\u0022 data-figure-caption=\u0022\u0026lt;div class=\u0026quot;highwire-markup\u0026quot;\u0026gt;Simulations suggest that spillover currents increase the reliability of MF signaling. Simulated EPSCs with quantal variance and spillover at \u0026#x2013;76 mV for three different MF-GC synaptic connections with mean amplitudes that were small (A1; N = 1, PR = 0.22, and QP =\u0026#x2013;14.7 pA), similar to the mean (B1; N = 5, PR = 0.46, and QP =\u0026#x2013;16.7 pA), and large (C1; N = 9, PR = 0.42, and QP =\u0026#x2013;16.5 pA). Values for quantal variability were CVQS = 0.26 and CVQII = 0.31. The gray traces in each panel show 30 individual EPSCs and failures; the black trace is the average. A2, B2, and C2 show simulated EPSPs for the same currents as in A1, B1, and C1 for a passive single-compartment model with a baseline membrane potential of \u0026#x2013;76 mV. A3, B3, and C3 show PV \u0026gt; Vthreshold as a function of the baseline voltage for the connections simulated above. Each symbol represents the probability over 1000 trials; filled circles show the relationship without spillover, and open triangles show the relationship in the presence of spillover. A4, B4, and C4 show the relationship between the SD of the times when the EPSC crossed a \u0026#x2013;50 mV threshold and the baseline voltage; each symbol represents the SD calculated over 1000 trials.\u0026lt;\/div\u0026gt;\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022hw-responsive-img\u0022\u003E\u003Cimg class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-image lazyload\u0022 alt=\u0022Figure 11.\u0022 src=\u0022data:image\/gif;base64,R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAP\/\/\/yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAIBRAA7\u0022 data-src=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F11.medium.gif\u0022 width=\u0022408\u0022 height=\u0022440\u0022\/\u003E\u003Cnoscript\u003E\u003Cimg class=\u0022highwire-fragment fragment-image\u0022 alt=\u0022Figure 11.\u0022 src=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F11.medium.gif\u0022 width=\u0022408\u0022 height=\u0022440\u0022\/\u003E\u003C\/noscript\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cul class=\u0022highwire-figure-links inline\u0022\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022download-fig first\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F11.large.jpg?download=true\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-download\u0022 title=\u0022Download Figure 11.\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EDownload figure\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022new-tab\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/content\/jneuro\/25\/36\/8173\/F11.large.jpg\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-newtab\u0022 target=\u0022_blank\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EOpen in new tab\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003Cli class=\u0022download-ppt last\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022\/highwire\/powerpoint\/467034\u0022 class=\u0022highwire-figure-link highwire-figure-link-ppt\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003EDownload powerpoint\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003C\/ul\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022fig-caption\u0022 xmlns:xhtml=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022fig-label\u0022\u003E\n Figure 11.\n \u003C\/span\u003E \n \u003Cp id=\u0022p-55\u0022\u003ESimulations suggest that spillover currents increase the reliability of MF signaling. Simulated EPSCs with quantal variance and spillover at \u201376 mV for three different MF-GC synaptic connections with mean amplitudes that were small (\u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EA1\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E; \u003Cem\u003EN\u003C\/em\u003E = 1, \u003Cem\u003EP\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Csub\u003ER\u003C\/sub\u003E = 0.22, and \u003Cem\u003EQ\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Csub\u003EP\u003C\/sub\u003E =\u201314.7 pA), similar to the mean (\u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EB1\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E; \u003Cem\u003EN\u003C\/em\u003E = 5, \u003Cem\u003EP\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Csub\u003ER\u003C\/sub\u003E = 0.46, and \u003Cem\u003EQ\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Csub\u003EP\u003C\/sub\u003E =\u201316.7 pA), and large (\u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EC1\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E; \u003Cem\u003EN\u003C\/em\u003E = 9, \u003Cem\u003EP\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Csub\u003ER\u003C\/sub\u003E = 0.42, and \u003Cem\u003EQ\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Csub\u003EP\u003C\/sub\u003E =\u201316.5 pA). Values for quantal variability were CV\u003Csub\u003EQS\u003C\/sub\u003E = 0.26 and CV\u003Csub\u003EQII\u003C\/sub\u003E = 0.31. The gray traces in each panel show 30 individual EPSCs and failures; the black trace is the average. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EA2, B2\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E, and \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EC2\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E show simulated EPSPs for the same currents as in \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EA1, B1\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E, and \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EC1\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E for a passive single-compartment model with a baseline membrane potential of \u201376 mV. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EA3, B3\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E, and \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EC3\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E show \u003Cem\u003EP\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Csub\u003E\u003Cem\u003EV\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026gt; \u003Cem\u003EV\u003C\/em\u003Ethreshold\u003C\/sub\u003E as a function of the baseline voltage for the connections simulated above. Each symbol represents the probability over 1000 trials; filled circles show the relationship without spillover, and open triangles show the relationship in the presence of spillover. \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EA4, B4\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E, and \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003Cem\u003EC4\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E show the relationship between the SD of the times when the EPSC crossed a \u201350 mV threshold and the baseline voltage; each symbol represents the SD calculated over 1000 trials.\u003C\/p\u003E\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022sb-div caption-clear\u0022\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022highwire-journal-article-marker-end\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cspan id=\u0022related-urls\u0022\u003E\u003C\/span\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/li\u003E\u003C\/ul\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E \u003C\/div\u003E\n\n \n \u003C\/div\u003E\n\u003Cdiv class=\u0022panel-separator\u0022\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022panel-pane pane-earthchem\u0022 \u003E\n \n \n \n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022pane-content\u0022\u003E\n \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/ecp.iedadata.org\/doidata\/10.1523\/JNEUROSCI.2051-05.2005\u0022 class=\u0022\u0022 data-icon-position=\u0022\u0022 data-hide-link-title=\u00220\u0022\u003E\u003Cimg src=\u0022http:\/\/ecp.iedadata.org\/doibanner\/10.1523\/JNEUROSCI.2051-05.2005\u0022 alt=\u0022\u0022 \/\u003E\u003C\/a\u003E \u003C\/div\u003E\n\n \n \u003C\/div\u003E\n\u003C\/div\u003E\n \u003C\/div\u003E\n\u003C\/div\u003E\n\u003C\/div\u003E\u003Cscript type=\u0022text\/javascript\u0022 src=\u0022https:\/\/www.jneurosci.org\/sites\/default\/files\/js\/js_hZg96SP9gBcOluDp2mGc57d8sP8uJ7g8P_JYsCISOgQ.js\u0022\u003E\u003C\/script\u003E\n\u003C\/body\u003E\u003C\/html\u003E"}